You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Hydrosurgical debridement versus conventional surgical debridement for acute partial‐thickness burns
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012826.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin Cr Wormald, Ryckie G Wade, Jonathan A Dunne, Declan P Collins, Abhilash Jain |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 38% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 31% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 172 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 34 | 20% |
| Unknown | 71 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 16 | 9% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 7% |
| Unknown | 79 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,608,507
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,259
of 13,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,159
of 426,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#102
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.